A recent decision by the Personal Injury Commission addresses a claim made by Mr Narinder Singh ('Mr Singh') for lump sum compensation for permanent impairment arising from psychological injuries allegedly sustained during his employment with both Westpac Banking Corporation ('Westpac') and TAL Services Limited ('TAL').
Background
Mr Singh commenced employment with Westpac as a Customer Manager on 10 August 2020 and remained in that role until 1 August 2022. During his tenure, he developed a primary psychological injury—specifically, major depressive disorder—attributed to excessive workload and work-related stress. This injury was deemed to have occurred on 28 May 2021.
Following a period of absence, Mr Singh resumed duties with Westpac on or around 9 January 2022 under modified working arrangements which saw him gradually return to full-time work with restricted duties. His employment subsequently transitioned to TAL on 1 August 2022. His psychological condition deteriorated as his workload and stressed increased, and he ceased work with TAL on 22 August 2022. Mr Singh then filed a claim for lump sum compensation for permanent impairment against both employers.
Proceedings Before the Personal Injury Commission
A hearing was conducted on 14 November 2024 after the parties to the proceedings were unable to reach a negotiated resolution.
Evidence Considered
Documentary Evidence
The Commission reviewed an extensive collection of documentary material.
Oral Evidence
No oral evidence was presented.
Statements
Mr Singh submitted a detailed account outlining his experiences with both employers. He highlighted increased workload and insufficient support at TAL, which he claimed led to a further decline in his mental health.
Additional statements were provided by Ms Phillips and Mr Rowe, addressing workloads at Westpac. Mr Brett Prado, who served as Mr Singh's manager at both Westpac and TAL, also submitted a statement. However, the Commissioner found Mr Prado's account largely unpersuasive and inconsistent with Mr Singh's evidence—particularly in relation to the support provided and system changes at TAL.
Medical and Expert Reports
Medical evidence was extensive and included reports from treating practitioners—Dr Shanmugaratnam, Dr Saeed, Dr Verma, and psychologist Mr Karimyar—as well as independent medical experts Dr Khan (for Mr Singh), Dr Anwar (for TAL), Dr Bisht (for Westpac), and Dr Hoey-Thompson (for TAL). These reports consistently diagnosed Mr Singh with major depressive disorder, often accompanied by anxiety and panic attacks. They provided varying opinions on the causes and contributing factors of his condition in relation to his employment with each respondent.
Reasons for Decision
The Commissioner noted that there was no dispute regarding Mr Singh's psychological injury sustained during his employment with Westpac on 28 May 2021, with that employment constituting a substantial or primary contributing factor.
Mr Singh's evidence regarding changes in systems, an increased workload, and a lack of support at TAL was accepted over the more general statements made by Mr Prado (Manager at both Westpac and TAL). Reports from treating practitioners supported a marked deterioration in Mr Singh's psychological condition shortly after commencing employment at TAL. Notably, Dr Shanmugaratnam reported a "crash down" in mental health, including several panic attacks within days of the employment transition.
While the independent medical experts offered diverging views—Dr Khan attributing the injury solely to Westpac, Dr Anwar failing to address the possibility of aggravation, and Dr Bisht offering an unexplained percentage attribution—the Commissioner found the treating practitioners' observations more persuasive.
It was ultimately determined that Mr Singh suffered an aggravation, acceleration, deterioration, or exacerbation of his pre-existing psychological injury as a direct result of his employment with TAL. This aggravation was found to be primarily attributable to the stressors experienced in that role, with no significant non-work-related contributing factors.
Decision
The Personal Injury Commission concluded that Mr Singh sustained a psychological injury by way of aggravation during the course of his employment with the second respondent, TAL. The injury was deemed to have occurred on 22 August 2022, with the employment with TAL being the main contributing factor to the injury.
This decision reiterates the importance of detailed and specific evidence, particularly from treating medical practitioners, in establishing causation for aggravation of pre-existing psychological injuries.
If you or someone you know has been affected by stressors in the workplace that have caused or aggravated a psychological condition, they may have entitlements to workers compensation and should seek legal advice from an accredited specialist in workers compensation law.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
